Printable View
Just as a matter of interest Mud Hut, the picture of the muzzle of your rifle shows the foresoght blade way, way off to the left. The spec standard states that the permissable allowance for foresight deflection is when the bed of the blade reaches the edge of the foresight block band. Inboard of that means that there's something wrong.
Indeed it is, Sir. I had to drift the sight way over to get it anywhere close to center. I have a '42 Long Branch that has the same afflicition but not nearly to that extent. On the Savage, the rear sight ladder spindle is bent and appears to be missing a detent at the top sprocket. I wonder if that would be enough to cause the misalignment or if there is something else going on. I have considered trying to find another S marked rear sight or letting my gunsmith have a go at fixing the one on it. Any suggestions on how to fix the misalignment and a possible replacement for the rear sight would be greatly appreciated.
I took some of the furniture off. There is a folded piece of paper between the barrel and the front hand guard that I assume was placed there at some point for some barrel pressure or a loose hand guard. Inside the rear hand guard is the same JC N22 stamp with the arrow that is on the underside of the stock (not JC 1122 as previously reported). On one side of the barrel appears the number 44. On the other appears a pressure test rating. The front hand guard has the serial number of the rifle penciled in it. The stock is cracked--do I need to fix that or is that common with this model? Any information about these items would be appreciated.
There's several new threads here. The "Reader's Digest" version-
1.Shimming is not the proper way to bed the fore end - there should be articles existing on this subject. Definitely ought not be a shim on top!
2. The N22 marks are the manufacturer's ID code- British wood, I believe.
3.The '44 on the barrel appears to be the manufacture date of the barrel- it also appears to be of British origins, but my monitor is not very good.
4.The elaborate proof marks were done when it was surplused from service.
5. Penciled serial numbers are common on converted rifles- made it easier to put the bits back on the rifle from which they came.
6. Cracked fore ends aren't uncommon and should be properly repaired for best shooting results. Maybe you can combine this task w/ the bedding procedure. Probably an article on this repair is in the library, also.
Look through these! Lee Enfield On-line Knowledge Libraries (Index of Articles) - Military Surplus Collectors Forums
Yup, there's a bunch to wade through...
Can anyone comment on the date that the .303" 2.222" tons per etc proof marks were introduced for commercial proofing?
I would say that with a bit of paper stuck on the barrel like that, that it was in private hands before it was exported as opposed to coming from the UK Military because a paper patch thinggy looks, well, sort of, er ..., not an Armourers touch!
Rear stock splits were easily repaired and the best option if the rifle is shooting well. Just drill right through from left to right at the place where the wood is at its meatiest then make a slightly tapered oak dowel, glue it and the hole, then tap it in place. Cramp up then make good 24 hrs later and it'll last another lifetime
Not exactly sure, but here's an interesting page from the Birmingham Proof site ... :thup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
The Proof and Testing of Firearms (click here)
Regards,
Badger
Both my Savage H&H rifles shoot center with iron sights and the front sights are centered the way they came wonderful rifles.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
The proof stamp is 19.5 tons per square inch.
Have been away for awhile. My gunsmith has returned the rifle after recrowing the barrel (which he described as suspect) and screwing in the barrel a bit...perhaps explaining the severe wind drift adjustment of the front sight. I want to put a scope on it. Any suggestions regarding a current production scope that would fit would be appreciaed. I tried a Swift 1.5x4.5 but the turrets did not allow the scope to move forward enough. I also tried a scope with a 40 mm front lens but the bell is too large. I wonder if Weaver's 1x3 V Classic would fit far enough forward to work.
A good old thread!
Burris 4x compact:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff019-3.jpg
Since you've put the bracket on the rifle, no sense not using it!